Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1887-01-22

OF which has just been published In Torn
worthy Of the contents by q. y. Putnam
Sons, New York. IL is a handsome spsci
mon OF book making, with an air OF sole
digninod elegance about II that we'll BELTS III
character. ] don't know that tho Knicker
booker Press, though 1t always does excel
lent work, ever produced anything bette
than this well proportional octave, with III
beautifully printed pages extra fine paper
and chsste and tasteful binding. Contain
Ing between i've and six hundred pages, thi,
volume treats with sufficient fullness " Tn,
Development OF American Thought" M dis
tinguished from " "Americsn Poetry and
ficti0n,' to which the concluding volume
promised for next year, Is to be devoted
| The contents OF the book before me are
every way deserving OF the best efforts OF
tho publishers. II IL work such as our lit.
erature has long been waiting for, and such
as many OF Us feared IL would have 10 wal
Tor gooi while longer yet For In tho hts-
torisD of literature 80 young ss ours there
are qualities required such a. can't be
| picked up Just anywhere Indeed, not
once In generation, perhaps not once In q
century, does a man appear equipped 10y ma
ture, attachments, and fortunate circum.
| stances with the rare and exceptional quail
ties demanded Of the true historian OF Iitera-
| ture. For, a. Prof Richardson frankly con-
| issses, " No critical task IL more difficult and
delicate than that Of estimating the rank and
| analyzing the achievements OF American au-
| thors." And that Is the task of the historian.
| He must be other and more than a mere
| chronicler, and his work must be more ana
other than mere description, however cor
rect and interesting. This gift or art, of
" estimating the rank and anal yzing the
achievements OF American authors,' acsord.
Ing to some broad, fixed and fundamental
principle, and not merely In accordance with
individual feeling, personal taste, or the
whin of popular fashion and opinion, Is
what ms heretofore been lacking. Truth to
say, iu ,uo1' cases Of 20 call cd histor iAns Of
our literature. the lack has been facility ad.
mitted by their scarcely making any serious
attempt at really critical work. Our histories
have nearly all been simply chronicles and
descriptions.
THE essential requirements OF the historian
OF American literature | conceive to be, first
OF all, that he DO himself native American,
born and bred amidst the traditions, customs,
feelings OF tho country, with American his
tory behind him, American prospects and
hopes before him, imbued with the Ameri.
can spirit and temperament, and seeing
things from the American point OF view.
The absence OF this prime qualification Is the
cause OF whatever insuiiiciency aud unsatis-
factoriness there IL In the only com plete his
tory Of American literature yet exisnt, that
OF Prof John Nichol, of England.
KNOW that the very opposite OF Whist ]
just said IL often maintained. 1t is held that
only a non.American can write calmly. so.
berly and impartially of our literature and
literary men. The volume before me utterly
refutes this opinion. Moreover as its author
very truly says on this very subject "In
considering American literature we
cannot safely say that the judgment OF for
eigners IL the judgment OF posterity The
most intelligent Europeans often make The
most startling mistakes concerning literary
matter here. Victor Hugo declared, without
hesitation, that Poe was the prince OF Amer.
lean literature and yet, II Is said, professed
entire ignorance OF Emerson's name when IL |
was mentioned TO him. Bret Harts, Mark |
Twain and other humorists are deemed by |
many our most characteristic writer's, while |
other critics aver that joaquin Miller IL a
truer representative of the life of this coun.
try, and still others insist that we really have
no Americdn poet save Whitman. The |
earlier English critics raised Longtelo~ t. |
pinnacle of fame some later ones dismiss |
him as the poet OF the commonplace an
educated gentleman, who made fair trausla-
tions and neatly copied foreign models ior |
the homo public Of the less cultured order. |
In Longfellow's case praise has been followed |
by blame but some recent English over. |
praise OF American wOrk-especially in tic- |
tion-is scarcely less 70 be deplored than the |
former sharp criticism. Once Sidney Smith |
made his nackneyed query, John Keats dis
missed all American books as worthless, and |
Southey could find here nothing to praise |
but Mrs Brooks ZOphiel or the Bride OF |
Seven Now London and Paris aud Berlin
Journals are telling us that our stories are the |
pest In the world, and that this or that new
American novel Is sure of permanent place !
In the literature OF the language. We know /
that the old denounCers were wrong Let us |
not be too sure that the later praisers are
right, Both fall into fatal error OF perspec
tive"
He concludes on this point with the follow
ing Just declaration " 10 a word, foreign |
criticism of American literature is with all |
its ability, discernment and appreciation, tCo |
often linited in view, bound by the modern
fondness for neat fiction-mon gering, or
dazzled by unfamiliar forms OF verse or les. |
1t does not help us in the matter OF literary |
perspective. We dare not rely upon it |
for just description of our works
and ways What follows proves that
Prot. Richardson Is fully aware OF the
greatness and the difficulty OF the work ne
has undertaken. 1t shows also, however,
that he knows what he IL about, and that we
may look for work from hi II such as " Q have
as yet had from no other historian. "The
critic OF American literature" he saws
"should be thoroughly acquainted with both
English and American political, social, aud
literary history should perceive clearly that
in England and America is q dominant and
assimilaiing Saxon folk, working out a sim.
liar problem on similar lines and yet should
discriminate between yarient conditions |
aims, methods and results. 1t Is not too
much to say that no foreign historian OF our
literature has shown himself possessed OF all
these qualifications" Nor is it too much to
say, Rs every careful reader OF this volume |
will at once allow, that Prot Richardson
does possess these qualifications to q degree
seldom found In any one man.
lr Is In fact a cause for grea. congratulation
that this writer Is what he is. First of slI an
American in the truest sense, OF stsunch
New England stock, yet OF long enough resi-
dence in the Middle states, and OF thorough
enough training on the staff of several of the
most cosmopolitan journals In the country,
TO say nothing OF his thorough education aud
broad culture, to have left no trace of New
England provinciaiisn, or copceit IN his
mind or character. His literary reviews In
the New York Independent, The Critic, and
The Sanday School Times, have shown him
to be critic not only OF remarkable keen
ness, but OF singular justice and fairness.
Those who are personally acquainted with
Prof Richardson know to what an unusual
degree he Ia possessed OF the judicial temper.
ament, and how grandly In all things the |
truth Is his aim, and conscience his ABSOLUTE
ruler. "Foolish patriotism, local pride, the |
influence OF popular enthusiasm and preju
dice resentment OF foreign blame, delight a.
foreign praise,-these things cannot en- |
dure In the clear light OF true criticism -
they certainly have no in iuencs on the liter
ary conscience OF Prot. Richardson.